mlsanityData to 14 Oct 2026

Towards Improved Preference Optimization Pipeline: from Data Generation to Budget-Controlled Regularization

arXiv 2411.05875 ↗First posted 7 Nov 2024cs.LG cs.AI cs.CLcited by 4

On the map: LLM alignment / RLHF / preference optimisation → LLM preference optimization methods

Abstract (arXiv)

Direct Preference Optimization (DPO) and its variants have become the de facto standards for aligning large language models (LLMs) with human preferences or specific goals. However, DPO requires high-quality preference data and suffers from unstable preference optimization. In this work, we aim to improve the preference optimization pipeline by taking a closer look at preference data generation and training regularization techniques. For preference data generation, we demonstrate that existing scoring-based reward models produce unsatisfactory preference data and perform poorly on out-of-distribution tasks. This significantly impacts the LLM alignment performance when using these data for preference tuning. To ensure high-quality preference data generation, we propose an iterative pairwise ranking mechanism that derives preference ranking of completions using pairwise comparison signals. For training regularization, we observe that preference optimization tends to achieve better convergence when the LLM predicted likelihood of preferred samples gets slightly reduced. However, the widely used supervised next-word prediction regularization strictly prevents any likelihood reduction of preferred samples. This observation motivates our design of a budget-controlled regularization formulation. Empirically we show that combining the two designs leads to aligned models that surpass existing SOTA across two popular benchmarks.

Key facts. Cited by 4 papers in the map (data through 14 Oct 2026). Placed in LLM preference optimization methods, one of 10 directions in LLM alignment / RLHF / preference optimisation. Builds on 20 of its 45 references that are in the map. First posted on arXiv 7 Nov 2024.

Builds on

20 of 45 references.

Closest ancestors · 10

Same direction, newest first

  1. 2024SimPO: Simple Preference Optimization with a Reference-Free Reward23 May
  2. 2024Understanding the performance gap between online and offline alignment algorithms14 May
  3. 2024Learn Your Reference Model for Real Good Alignment15 Apr
  4. 2024Towards Analyzing and Understanding the Limitations of DPO: A Theoretical Perspective6 Apr
  5. 2024sDPO: Don't Use Your Data All at Once28 Mar
  6. 2024Disentangling Length from Quality in Direct Preference Optimization28 Mar
  7. 2024Arithmetic Control of LLMs for Diverse User Preferences: Directional Preference Alignment with Multi-Objective Rewards28 Feb
  8. 2024Smaug: Fixing Failure Modes of Preference Optimisation with DPO-Positive20 Feb
  9. 2024Contrastive Preference Optimization: Pushing the Boundaries of LLM Performance in Machine Translation16 Jan
  10. 2023A General Theoretical Paradigm to Understand Learning from Human Preferences18 Oct

Other references · 10

  1. 2023Direct Preference Optimization: Your Language Model is Secretly a Reward Modelcited by 8,065
  2. 2022Training a Helpful and Harmless Assistant with Reinforcement Learning from Human Feedbackcited by 3,720
  3. 2019Fine-Tuning Language Models from Human Preferencescited by 2,150
  4. 2024Length-Controlled AlpacaEval: A Simple Way to Debias Automatic Evaluatorscited by 897
  5. 2024RewardBench: Evaluating Reward Models for Language Modelingcited by 499
  6. 2024Prometheus 2: An Open Source Language Model Specialized in Evaluating Other Language Modelscited by 446
  7. 2023SLiC-HF: Sequence Likelihood Calibration with Human Feedbackcited by 401
  8. 2024Interpretable Preferences via Multi-Objective Reward Modeling and Mixture-of-Expertscited by 376
  9. 2023Iterative Preference Learning from Human Feedback: Bridging Theory and Practice for RLHF under KL-Constraintcited by 350
  10. 2024Provably Mitigating Overoptimization in RLHF: Your SFT Loss is Implicitly an Adversarial Regularizercited by 109

Built on by

Cited by year

Citing papers per year: 2025: 4.

4 papers.

Similar, not cited

Close in wording, no citation either way

  1. 2025Less is More: Improving LLM Alignment via Preference Data Selection
  2. 2025Finding the Sweet Spot: Preference Data Construction for Scaling Preference Optimization
  3. 2025Adaptive Batch-Wise Sample Scheduling for Direct Preference Optimization
  4. 2024Optimizing LLMs with Direct Preferences: A Data Efficiency Perspective
  5. 2024Relative Preference Optimization: Enhancing LLM Alignment through Contrasting Responses across Identical and Diverse Prompts
  6. 2024Unified Preference Optimization: Language Model Alignment Beyond the Preference Frontier
  7. 2024Towards a Unified View of Preference Learning for Large Language Models: A Survey
  8. 2025Beyond Pairwise: Empowering LLM Alignment With Ranked Choice Modeling